James Chace on C-SPAN's Booknotes with Brian Lamb
- BRIAN LAMB, HOST: James Chace, author of "1912," I want to read a
quote from your book from Woodrow Wilson, after Versailles, after
World War I. "If I didn't feel that I was a personal instrument of
God, I couldn't carry on." Sound at all like today?
JAMES CHACE, AUTHOR, "1912: WILSON, ROOSEVELT, TAFT AND DEBS -- THE
ELECTION THAT CHANGED THE COUNTRY": It sounds very much like
today. In fact, I think what we're seeing in the Bush
administration, actually, is a -- what I would call neo-
Wilsonianism, a latter-day Wilsonianism, in which the president, I
think, also feels very much that he is doing what is -- it is his
destiny that God has given him to fulfill, which is very similar to
what Woodrow Wilson believed at Versailles.
LAMB: So is the Bush administration Wilsonian all through? And
what does that mean?
CHACE: Well, it's-- I think it's certainly true in the White House
and among the people around the president, known as the
neoconservatives. They have a very strong belief that you should
impose democracy in other parts of the world, which is very much a
Wilsonian view. This time, however, it's a military imposition of
democracy, and it's very questionable whether that would work, it
seems to me.
LAMB: If Woodrow Wilson was here today, what party would he be in?
CHACE: That's a good question. I think, probably, he might very
well be in the Republican Party, in that sense, although his
domestic policy was very different from the Republican Party today,
which is basically a conservative party, and the conservative wing
of the party very much has power. So Wilson would have to straddle,
I guess, is what we say nowadays. He'd have to straddle.
LAMB: Now, if Theodore Roosevelt, anther subject in your book, was
here today, what party would he be in?
CHACE: He'd be John McCain, basically. And McCain is a tremendous
admirer of Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt was a -- again, very
radical, domestic policy, quite amazingly so. His platform in 1912
was probably the most radical platform perhaps any major candidate
for a major political party has ever run on. He was not only for
having a graduated income tax and to have inheritance tax, but also
to have women's suffrage, which was not popular among politicians at
that time, and even a national -- kind of national health care
policy. It was quite an amazingly a radical platform, Wilson (SIC)
LAMB: Who was for the idea back then of electing presidents -- I
mean, senators directly?
CHACE: Well, the Wilson administration -- the first Wilson
administration, the election of senators directly rather than by the
legislatures was passed. You see, what's interesting is that in
1912, the spirit of reform was so strong in the United States that
the Progressive Party, which was then Theodore Roosevelt's, after he
split the Republican Party to form his own party -- Roosevelt and
Wilson had a -- were very, very strong reformers, both of them.
Wilson came rather late to reform, and someone said he was rather
opportunistic, but nonetheless, it was reform. And in his first
administration, Wilson passed a tremendous amount of liberal
legislation, some of the things I just mentioned. Also, however,
the Federal Reserve Bank, which was a very important act, the
Federal Reserve Act because up to that point, private bankers,
notably J.P. Morgan, had really run the monetary policy of the
United States, a private banker. And that changed dramatically, the
way monetary policy should be run in this country, so you could
smooth out those ups and downs of monetary policy by intervention by
the Federal Reserve, rather than by a private banker bailing out the
country, which, as I say, J.P. Morgan did very effectively in 1907.
LAMB: If Eugene Debs, another subject in your book, was here today,
what party would he be in? Who would he be?
CHACE: Well, Gene Debs would not have a party he'd be very
comfortable in. Some people might have suggest he'd be sort of a
Ralph Nader, but I -- but again, the strong thing about Debs was his
real strong belief in unionism. He'd be on the left wing, I think,
of the Democratic Party today, I would think, the left wing of the
LAMB: President William Howard Taft, your fourth subject.
CHACE: William Howard Taft was a moderate conservative. He wasn't -
- he wasn't like the more extreme conservatives today in the
Republican Party, who tend to be very moralistic, for example, among
other things, and wanting to very much -- oftentimes it seems to be
to turn back the clock to a pre-New Deal period. Taft was a
moderate conservative. He believed that you should control big
business when it was out of hand by judicial means. In other words,
he didn't like to have a lot of legislation.
But yet nonetheless, when he was president, he brought more anti-
trust suits than his predecessor, Theodore Roosevelt, but always
based on the notion that they were doing something illegal. In
other words, he was a legal -- very much of a legalist. He always
wanted to be a Supreme Court Justice. And in fact, in 1921, he
became a Supreme Court Justice, which was what he always wanted to
be and was very happy in that role.
LAMB: Which book is this for you? How many?
CHACE: I can't remember. I think eight or nine, I guess.
LAMB: What was the last one?
CHACE: Last was a biography of Dean Acheson.
LAMB: How did that do?
CHACE: It did very -- it did -- I think it did quite well, as a
matter of fact.
LAMB: And why "1912"? What -- do you remember when you got
interested in this election?
CHACE: I got interested in it for backwards reasons. I spent my
whole life, pretty much, writing about foreign policy, and most of
the jobs I've held have been in the foreign policy field. At one
point, I was managing editor of "Foreign Affairs" magazine, et
cetera. And what began to interest me where the "what if's" of
history. What if Theodore Roosevelt had been elected president in
And then later on, I began to find out even more about it and saw
that he might have been elected in 1916, and that he would have been
elected in 1920, had he lived. Three things happened. In 1912, his
chosen heir, William Howard Taft, who was a good friend of his and
was a kind of lieutenant -- Taft was always a better lieutenant than
a captain, in that sense. Roosevelt put him in, in 1908, after he
finished his two terms as president. I mean, he was his anointed
heir. And he expected that Taft would carry out his policies, which
were reformist policies, not as extreme as he was in 1912, but still
a reformist president.
Taft probably wanted to do that, but Taft was not a good politician
and he didn't know how to manage the arch-conservatives of the
Republican Party, then under the control of Senator Nelson Aldridge
of Rhode Island, who was considered to be the manager of the United
States. What happened, in short, though, was that Roosevelt,
feeling that he -- that Taft had betrayed his policies, decided to
run against him for the Republican nomination. It was the very
beginning of a primary system in this country, direct primaries, and
Roosevelt ran in the primaries and got actually more delegates
coming to the convention than William Howard Taft. But the
machinery of the Republican Party disqualified many of Theodore
Roosevelt's -- 80 of Theodore Roosevelt's delegates and basically
handed the nomination to William Howard Taft.
So Roosevelt joined a new party and mobilized it, called the
Progressive Party. Now, had Roosevelt won the Republican nomination
and not formed a third party, he would almost surely have become
president of the United States. He was enormously popular, and the
United States was basically Republican, a majority of Republican,
I'd say. But also, there was a spirit of reform in the air.
Now, had he become president in 1912 -- this is the "what if" of
history that interested me -- it is almost very likely that the
United States might have entered World War I in 1915, after the
sinking of the steamship Lusitania, when a number of Americans lost
their lives when it was sunk by the German submarines during World
War I. Roosevelt would have liked to bring us into the war on the
allies' side. Had that happened, the war probably would have been
over a good deal earlier because the weight of the United States was
decisive in 1918, and I think it would have been decisive earlier.
Now, he had two more shots at being president, ironically. Had he
not run in 1912, supported Taft, even quietly and reluctantly, he
almost surely would have gotten the nomination in 1916, at the end
of Wilson's first term, because the man who did get it, a man called
Charles Evans Hughes, who had been governor of New York and Supreme
Court Justice, all but won the election in 1916. In fact, when
President Woodrow Wilson went to bed the night -- election night, he
thought he was beaten and woke up the next morning to find that
California (UNINTELLIGIBLE) came in and gave it to him, and
therefore he edged out Charles Evans Hughes.
Finally -- and this I found perhaps most interesting of all --
Roosevelt, having split the Republican Party, managed to repair his
relationship with it. He got rid of the Progressives, repaired
relationship by campaigning for Charles Evans Hughes, and then later
on, when things had started going less well for Wilson, he was a
very strong critic of Woodrow Wilson's policies in the latter part
of the First World War -- almost all historians agree today that
Theodore Roosevelt would have gotten the nomination in 1920, and in
which case, he almost surely would have won. He died at the
relatively early age of 60 years old in 1919.
Had Theodore Roosevelt become president in 1920, a number of things
would have happened which might have changed the course of the 20th
century. First of all, we would have had a League of Nations, which
Wilson espoused, but which Roosevelt was not opposed to, except that
it would have been a League of Nations with the reservations that
Roosevelt's good friend, Henry Cabot Lodge, the chairman of the --
Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
wanted, which was basically very minor reservations, saying that the
United States Congress should have the right to declare war, just
asserting the power of the Congress. It would have passed with
Then Roosevelt would have given the French guarantee to France and
Britain, something which Wilson again had offered, but the
Versailles treaty was voted down because Wilson would not compromise
on these minor reservations. At one point, he said, The Senate must
take its medicine, not a good way to get something passed by the
United States Senate. So that means you might have had a League of
Nations, a military (UNINTELLIGIBLE) France, and that might have
actually prevented the Second World War.
LAMB: Let me ask you some more about these individuals. Who -- I
know that Eugene Debs died at age 70, when he was -- in 1926. Who
lived the longest of the four men?
CHACE: I think it was Taft. I'm not absolutely positive. I think
it was Taft.
LAMB: And how long did Woodrow Wilson live?
CHACE: He lived to about 1924. I think it was 1924 when he died.
LAMB: Let me ask you about health.
LAMB: William Howard Taft, you say at one point, was how large?
CHACE: He was about 350 pounds. And there's a -- and of course,
you can't get away, when you think about Taft, about his weight --
there's two rather funny stories about Taft and the weight. One is,
he had to once be pried out of a bathtub, literally. They had to
make a special bathtub for him. And secondly, when he was serving
under Theodore Roosevelt as governor general of the Philippines, he
sent back a cable to the then secretary of state saying, Rode
horseback for 25 miles up in the hills. Never felt better. And the
secretary of state, then Elihu Root, sent back a brief cable to Taft
in the Philippines, saying, how is the horse? So that was a very
difficult thing with Taft. He couldn't get the weight down.
LAMB: How was his health, even though he was heavy?
CHACE: Not bad. Despite that enormous weight, not bad at all.
LAMB: But you talk about his wife's health.
CHACE: Yes, his wife's health was another matter. And it's a sad
story in many ways. Mrs. Taft, first of all, was the person who
most wanted William Howard Taft to be president. He, as I say, was
a reluctant president. He didn't want to be president. But his --
he wanted to go to the Supreme Court, and twice Theodore Roosevelt
offered it to him when Roosevelt was president, and twice Taft
turned it down, mainly because of his wife's pressure. His wife
thought he should become president. She didn't like the
Roosevelts. I think she was rather jealous of them, actually.
So finally, of course, she gets her wish. In 1908, he's elected
president and 1909, she's back -- she's in the White House. She's
going to redecorate it. She's going to give receptions. She's
going to -- it's going to be her White House and her tone. Only a
few months after Taft is in the White House, Mrs. Taft suffered a
severe stroke. She could never really be the hostess that she
wanted to be again. She did recover from the stroke. I mean, she
was able to talk and carry on things, but she never had that -- the
full force ever again. So it was a sad business for her.
LAMB: Her name?
CHACE: Helen Taft.
LAMB: I want to read the opening paragraph of chapter six. "Just
before an early dinner at the White House, the president was handed
a note from the Associated Press reporting Roosevelt's letter to the
governor saying that he would accept the nomination, if offered.
Taft read the news without comment and then passed the piece of
paper to others. No one spoke as they sat down to the table, until
Mrs. Taft broke the silence. `I told you so four years ago, and you
would not believe me.' The president laughed." Quote, "I know you
did, my dear, and I think you are perfectly happy now. You would
have preferred the colonel to come out against me than to have been
What's that all about?
CHACE: Well, Taft was -- maybe henpecked is the wrong word -- but
she was -- his wife was a bossy woman, wasn't an easy woman. Taft
was very decent to her, and I have no sense that he had an affair,
for example, or anything like that, but he was certainly -- had a
tough time with her. And I think he saw -- she would really rather
have been right than anything else. And for Taft, actually, it was
exactly the opposite of what he wanted. He was a very jovial,
decent man. As someone once said of Taft, he was a jovial man
surrounded by men who knew exactly what they wanted. And he
couldn't really handle the conservative wing of the party.
LAMB: Back to health. Woodrow Wilson -- you list three strokes
before the big one, 1896, 1904, 1906 -- and you say that was the
grave one -- and then a massive stroke September the 18th, 1919.
He'd been president and been re-elected.
LAMB: How much did the public know in 1912 when they went to the
polls that he had had three strokes?
CHACE: I don't think they knew it at all. I don't think they knew
it at all. There's no evidence they would. And indeed, what's
shocking is that the massive stroke that he had when he was
campaigning in the West in 1919 in favor of his Versailles treaty
and his League of Nations -- the public was not informed what had
happened. He was brought back on the train from Colorado and into
Union Station here in Washington and then brought to the White
House, and then in the bedroom, attended by his personal physician,
a man called Dr. Cary Grayson (ph), and Mrs. Wilson, the second Mrs.
Wilson, by the way. His first wife had died and he remarried.
And then a really extraordinary thing happened in this country.
Here was the president in a bedroom, paralyzed on his left side,
hardly able to speak. He did get somewhat better as time passed,
but for the first couple of months, he was really hardly able to do
much. He could speak a few words. And the country was being run by
Mrs. Wilson. She didn't tell anybody -- no one leveled with the
public, nor with the Senate, nor with the cabinet. People suspected
things, but they weren't of told anything. When someone wanted to
come in to see the president, eventually, this person would be
brought into the bedroom, the president would be propped on the side
that was not paralyzed, so he could raise his hand, and he could say
a few words by then. But the -- if you wanted to have a bill
signed, if -- she would be the person who would bring it in to him
to have it signed, or say it couldn't be done. She monitored the
letters. We don't know what he saw and what he didn't see. He
eventually got somewhat better, by the way. He was able to speak,
eventually, more normally but never very much the same man.
LAMB: Go back to the 1906 stroke, though. Loss of the sight in one
CHACE: Yes. Yes. Partially.
LAMB: And where did he have this? What was he doing then?
CHACE: I frankly can't remember exactly. He was president of
Princeton at the time. I don't know the moment he had the stroke,
LAMB: And nobody knew it, though, when he ran.
CHACE: Nobody knew it when he ran, that I know of.
LAMB: Now, today could somebody run and have no eyesight in one eye?
CHACE: He had some eyesight. He wasn't blind.
LAMB: He had some...
CHACE: It was impaired. Let's put it that way. But he could see.
Roosevelt himself didn't have very good eyesight, either, for
I think it'd be almost impossible today, and it would be impossible
for a doctor, like his own doctor, to keep this. It seems to me
that's against any medical ethics. The vice president should have
become at least the temporary president. He wasn't a very
interesting vice president. Thomas Marshall known (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
to say, what this country needs is a good five-cent cigar. But
nonetheless, he was the vice president, and he should have been
president. It was shocking.
LAMB: Eugene Debs of Terre Haute, Indiana. His health?
CHACE: Debs was a man who was constantly overworking, one might
say. He made speeches all the time for the Socialist Party and for
his belief in -- that you need a broad-based industrial union to
deal with the evils of industrial capitalism day and night. And so
his health was never that good. He would exhaust himself too
easily. He'd come down with, I don't know, flus, colds, things of
that nature, was often bedridden for a while. He'd go off to a
sanatorium to recover from just exhaustion, as far as we know. He
did live until 1924, so...
LAMB: How many times did he run for president?
CHACE: Let's see. One, two -- I think it was four times for
LAMB: And his relationship with his wife?
CHACE: It was not a warm relationship. His wife was -- interesting
enough, for a man who was a socialist and very much a man of the
people, as Debs was -- she was from a well-to-do family in Terre
Haute, Indiana. And in one sense, she was marrying someone who was,
at the time, a rising young man. He was even doing a little -- in a
business sense. But she had to go along with him in his leftist
beliefs, eventually, and she did. She stuck with him, and he never
spoke ill of her, but he spent an awful lot of time away from her,
and one can't really see that it was a close marriage. They had no
children. She -- they ended up living in one of the largest houses
in Terre Haute because she inherited a little money. She went to
visit him in prison once, when he was imprisoned after leading the
famous Pullman strike in the 1890s, and she was visiting him in
prison with all her jewels around her neck and pearls.
And late on -- it doesn't come in the book because I didn't do that
much after 1912 in detail on his personal life, but actually, he
himself had kind of affair himself later, actually, in the -- around
the -- during the Second -- during the First World War. So clearly,
this was not a warm marriage. But he never did anything publicly to
break the marriage or anything was ever said openly about anything.
He spent a lot of time with his brother, who -- and with someone
running a newspaper, which was a major contributor. So it was not a
warm marriage, but it was a Victorian marriage in a kind of way, I
LAMB: When you go -- when you went back to that period of time to
research it, did you -- how prominent was the Debs name in this
country in 1912 and all through those years when he ran?
CHACE: Oh, very prominent. Debs was, I came to conclude, almost a
kind of secular saint. You see, the point about Debs was, even if
you disagreed with his socialist views of the -- having basic
industries owned by the state, et cetera, Debs gave away all of his
money when he traveled. And when he'd go somewhere and come back,
he'd have no money left. He'd just give it to people who needed
money. His concern for other people was profound. His
identification with the working class was profound.
And above all, he managed to rise above these very, oh, scholastic
kind of debates among the socialists at that time. Debs wasn't
interested in that stuff. He kept his mind on one thing that you
had to have a broad-based where skilled workers and unskilled
workers could be in the same unit. In those days, the American
Federation of Labor, which was the main union, allowed only skilled
workers. Debs wanted everybody to be in the main union. And
eventually, that came to be, after his death, with the CIO, which
was a broad-based union.
But Debs's reputation was very high in this country, even when
people disagreed with him. There's a -- I can't resist this
wonderful story. Debs -- sad and then wonderful, I think. Sad
because he was imprisoned during the First World War by Woodrow
Wilson's administration because he spoke out against the First World
War. And there was a thing called the Espionage Act had been
passed, or the Sedition Act. And many prominent people who were not
socialists said he should be pardoned. He should be released. And
Wilson, who was a very hard man, said he was a traitor to the
country. He'd never be part of my administration.
Interestingly enough, though he is in prison in Atlanta, Georgia, he
runs, by the way, for president from Atlanta, Georgia, and gets
almost -- he gets about the same number of votes he got in 1912,
though not as high a percentage of votes. Then Warren G. Harding
comes in, a Republican president.
LAMB: In `20.
CHACE: In 1920. And he decides that he's going to bind up a lot of
these wounds that were inflicted by the Wilson administration
domestically, in this kind of red hunt, et cetera. And he doesn't
exactly pardon, but he commutes the sentence of Eugene Debs in
Atlanta, and so he releases him in Atlanta, and he says to stop off
at the White House on the way home. So Debs gets into a train in
Atlanta, comes up to Union Station in Washington, D.C., goes over to
the White House, brought into the president's office, and Harding
jumps up and says, Why, Mr. Debs, I've heard so much about you. I'm
awfully glad to meet you. So later on, they asked Debs how things
went, and he said, we understood each other perfectly. And I think
they did understand each other perfectly.
LAMB: What's the most amount of votes he ever got?
CHACE: Close to a million votes. Over 940,000, I believe it was.
LAMB: And the health of Theodore Roosevelt?
CHACE: Well, Theodore Roosevelt believed very strongly, as almost
anybody who knows about his life realizes, in the strenuous life.
As a boy, he was near-sighted. He was sickly, asthmatic, and very
much a bookworm, too. But at about 12 years old, his father, whom
he adored, said, now, you've made your mind. You've got to make
your body. And so he went into a regime of boxing and gymnastics
and then later on went out to the West and was a rancher, almost
like a cowboy. He formed a regiment during the Spanish-American War
called the Rough Riders. So he always believed in the strenuous
life, which is somehow he thought was morally the right thing to do,
manly thing to do, as he put it.
And he -- after he was president -- he left the presidency, I should
say, in 1909. In order not to cast a shadow on Taft, initially, he
went off to Africa to shoot wild beasts. So all this was active.
Also, after the defeat in 1912, he explored something called
the "River of Doubt" in the Amazon River, an unexplored part of
Brazil, where he all but died. I mean, it was a disastrous
expedition. I mean, he thought he was going to die, at one point --
the insects, just the general disease. It was a miracle he lived
and probably wouldn't have, if his son, who was 21 at that time,
wasn't with him.
So he was not in great health, interestingly enough. The strenuous
life was almost -- it was too strenuous. So he left the presidency
at the age of 50, a very young man, after all, and in 1919, I say,
he went in bad health. He was in bad health again, you know? Just -
- people didn't quite know what was wrong. They thought
rheumatism. Maybe it was the heart. It was one thing or the
other. And so he wasn't in good health at all.
It's interesting, though, you know, about Roosevelt. And he was --
just before he died -- and I think it was in January of 1919 -- some
time in December, when he felt (UNINTELLIGIBLE) but he was getting a
little better, it seemed, he got up and made the last public speech
he ever made, which was in New York City, for a black radical called
William E.B. Dubois, for the black veterans. And it's quite
remarkable because Roosevelt was a man who grew in office, in many,
many respects. He started out as a kind of patrician reformer and
really became a radical person. He came much more to espouse black
voting, to make sure that the -- anti-lynching, et cetera. So he
was a man who grew, I think, as a president.
LAMB: We have over 100 million people today that vote in our
elections for president in the United States. How many people,
roughly, voted in the elections of 1912, do you know?
CHACE: Gosh, I can't remember, I must confess.
LAMB: Is it 10 million? I mean, women could not vote.
CHACE: No, women could not vote.
LAMB: Could blacks vote?
CHACE: Well, blacks could vote in the North. In the South, there
were these Jim Crow laws which effectively prevented the blacks from
voting. They would have these poll taxes, and a poll tax -- most
poor blacks in the South many times couldn't pay any poll tax. So
the blacks (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and of course, women were not allowed to
vote. And women's suffrage, of course, was a major issue in this
period. So as I say, I can't remember the exact amount of votes,
but certainly, in one sense, there was a great deal of -- many
disenfranchised voters in the United States in 1912 and in this
LAMB: Trying to find -- I'm sure I wrote it down because I know you
gave us the figures. Maybe I can find it before we're finished. Go
back to 1912. These four men...
LAMB... all ran for president. What was the No. 1 thing on people's
mind in 1912 in this country, do you think?
CHACE: I think in 1912, what was happening was this tremendous
spirit of reform was splitting the country. And the thing that
people were most troubled by, if I could say, the most, probably was
trying to tame the great monopolies still, the monopoly capitalism.
That was a major, major issue at that time. How do you deal with
the great trusts, as they were called?
LAMB: Who were they?
CHACE: Well, there were things like -- there had been the Standard
Oil trust, at one point. There was the American Harvester company.
Many big companies formed holding companies within the thing, and
they began to -- and they were so large that they could effectively,
like any monopoly, control prices. And certainly, they could also
decide pretty much -- if they wanted to pay workers badly, they
could get away with that, too, because there wasn't enough
competition. So how did you deal with this growth of industrial
Now, these four men had all grown up in the 19th century, and they
were confronted in the early 20th century with the growth of
industrial capitalism. And small businesses were not -- we're being
swallowed up, at that point. You had to really change -- and they
didn't necessarily know what to do. They each had to cope the best
way they could.
For Taft, his way to cope with it was only through legalism because
business was here to stay, and if they do something wrong, we'll
prosecute them. Theodore Roosevelt took a different view. He
thought big business was indeed here to stay, but he believed it had
to be regulated. He was all for regulation, and that was his strong
thing. They've got to be regulated.
Wilson was against the big monopolies, but he wanted to try to break
the monopolies, rather than regulate them simply regulate them. And
to do that, he wanted to restore competition. His theory was, break
them and thus restore competition, and that effectively do it. Of
course, Debs, being a socialist, believed in state control of basic
industry, and so he would, of course, have the state take over a lot
of these large trusts. But that was the main issue.
But riding along with that issue were a host of these other problems
which people were very concerned with in the United States at that
time. There was, in fact, women's suffrage, which was a very big
issue. There were child labor -- you know, there needed to be new
laws on child labor employed in these places. Factory conditions --
remember, I think it was -- I think was 1911 was the famous Triangle
fire, where these shirtwaist -- women who made shirtwaists in a
shirtwaist factory in New York were caught in a fire and couldn't
get out because they had been locked -- they were locked in until
5:00 o'clock each day or 6:00 o'clock, whatever -- whenever the
shift ended. And they ended up by having to jump out the window and
destroying themselves in this fire. It was a terrible, terrible
So factory conditions were appalling, child labor, women's suffrage,
all of these things were on people's mind. And so the spirit of
reform had swept through this country, and therefore, three of the
four candidates were strongly reformist. Only Taft, and he was a
moderate reformer, I would say, moderate reformer. But you just --
you couldn't win if you weren't on the progressive side. You had to
be a progressive to get anywhere, to win an election in our country
at this time.
LAMB: I have found the numbers, and we'll put them on the screen...
CHACE: Good. Good.
LAMB... so people can see them, but I'll read them.
LAMB: So people could see them, but I'll read them.
LAMB: Woodrow Wilson in 1912 got 6,293,454 votes.
LAMB: Theodore Roosevelt...
LAMB... running on the third party progressive ticket, Bull Moose
Party, 4,119,538 votes. Taft, William Howard Taft, running on the
Republican ticket, 3,484,980 and finally Eugene Debs, 901,873. But
you also point out that Woodrow Wilson won 40 states, 435 electoral
college votes to six states for William -- I mean for Theodore
Roosevelt at 88 votes, and then only two states for William Howard
Taft. What does that -- what does that say to you?
CHACE: Well, it's a number of things. First of all, if you put the
votes together for the Republicans and the progressives -- if you're
assuming that Theodore Roosevelt got the nomination, of which he was
cheated out of, then you -- then you get a slightly different
figure, at least in the popular vote. Then you get over seven
million votes, you see, to Wilson.
Now, you can't be this exact, because some people would cross over.
But when you look at that, it is very hard not to believe that
Roosevelt would have won that.
Of course, the electoral vote, as we know ourselves, doesn't
necessarily reflect the popular vote. After all, only four years
ago Al Gore had, I think won by 540,000, 560,000 I think it was
votes. Now, that is a fair amount. Yet he lost the electoral
college. So electoral college votes are somewhat misleading. It
was a much closer election on one level than the electoral vote
LAMB: Before we go back to some of these characters in this book,
let me ask you about James Chace. Where are you from originally?
CHACE: I'm from Fall River, Massachusetts.
LAMB: And how long have you lived there?
CHACE: My whole life. I was born there. My family came from that
part of the world for, well, many generations.
LAMB: When did you get interested in history?
CHACE: Well, I'll tell you a story about that. It was in high
school -- in my high school American history class. And my
grandfather had been president of the Massachusetts Senate about --
during this general period, around the turn of the century, for
quite a number of years. And I had been told -- my grandfather died
by the time I was born, but I had always been told more or less that
William Howard Taft when he was president had stayed at my
grandfather's house, which probably was true, or could easily have
So I wrote a high school paper on William Howard Taft -- believe it
or not -- and never did I dream that so, 50 or more years later --
or whatever it was -- that I would ever write a book in which Taft
would play a major role, but that -- in a funny -- but it's
something strange in life that I should write a high school paper on
Taft and half a century later write a book in which he is a major
LAMB: Do you still have the paper?
CHACE: I do not have the paper, I wish I did.
LAMB: Do you remember your grade?
CHACE: I think I got a pretty good grade. I got a probably -- got
a good grade. Probably got an A or something like that.
LAMB: Fall River, Massachusetts, to what college?
CHACE: Harvard College.
LAMB: How did you get in?
CHACE: Well, I did well.
LAMB: Is it all -- I mean, in those days was it all based on -- you
didn't have SATs. It was all...
CHACE: Yes, you did.
LAMB: You did have?
CHACE: We had SATs. Had SATs.
LAMB: What year did you go? What was your freshman...?
CHACE: I went in 1949. And they had SATs, sure. But you had to --
you had to pick colleges rather differently, because you had to list
three colleges only, and they had to be in order. So if you listed
the third college, you might not get in it, and...
LAMB: What were your three?
CHACE: My first was Harvard, second was Colgate and third was
Brown. I didn't get in Brown, but -- and I had a really good time
there, and I was...
LAMB: What did you study at Harvard?
CHACE: Well, I -- interestingly enough, I didn't study history and
politics, as you might imagine. My life took a very different
turn. I was very literary in that period. I was the editor of the
literary magazine at Harvard called "The Harvard Advocate," and I
majored in French and Italian literature.
And I'll tell you how I came into politics, though, if you'd like to
know. After I got out of college I got a -- I got a fellowship to
go to Paris to study French literature, actually Baudelaire, the
poet Baudelaire, and the painter Delacroix, I went there -- and this
is 1954. And that year was the year in which the French lost
Indochina. It was very hard to be an American boy in France and not
become political. It was -- it would have been like a French boy in
the United States in 1968 say, you got some problems here?
And then I went -- I was then drafted into the army the year after
that. When I got back. And I was sent back to France in the army,
just as a, you know, private. When I got -- and only because my
name began with C, because the army -- they didn't look at much
else. But when I got there, to my base, which was Orleans, they
looked and saw -- they saw that I actually knew French, so they sent
me to the French army for two years as a kind of translator and
interpreter. And I was sent to Verdun, which is a famous place in
the First World War where the French held out against the Germans.
So, that was the period of the Algerian war. So by the time I'd
come back, I was very, very politicized, interestingly enough. That
really was a period. And I also began to see something, which was
not fashionable in the United States. I saw the connection between
what are called art and politics. It was a time when Albert Camus
was -- was writing his -- his famous books, Sartre was writing --
Jean-Paul Sartre was writing plays, Simone de Beauvoir was -- it was
a very active period in French literature and the theater, and it
was about being what the French called engage -- to be engaged. And
so when I came back I -- my life changed. I began studying here and
I did some -- even in France I did some studies in politics, and my
life -- my life took a completely different course, all because of
those three years in France. I don't know if it would have happened
LAMB: So did you ever work in politics?
CHACE: Well, not per se, but I spent my life in -- not in politics,
you see, but I spent my life in foreign policy, I got -- and worked
on magazines, which were devoted to foreign policy my whole life,
until about 10 years ago, when I started teaching at Bard College.
LAMB: Who owns "Foreign Affairs" magazine?
CHACE: The Council on Foreign Relations.
LAMB: And how long were you the managing editor?
CHACE: Fifteen years.
LAMB: So, that's your -- that is the core of your profession.
CHACE: Yes, that's the core of my profession. Before that I'd
founded a magazine called "Interplay," which was on U.S.-European
relations. Earlier than that, I'd worked for, I think, called "East
Europe Magazine" about East European politics. And later on, after
I left "Foreign Affairs," after being briefly at "The New York
Times," as a national affairs editor and the book review, I then
went -- I was then offered this job -- a chair -- a very nice chair
of national relations at Bard College, and at the same time somehow
I was offered the editorship of the magazine called "The World
So between -- I was really my life has been as an editor primarily,
and completely involved in foreign affairs, and all the -- almost
all the books I've written mostly had to do with foreign affairs.
LAMB: Here is Paul W. Williams, professor of government and public
law at Bard College.
CHACE: That's right.
LAMB: Who was Paul Williams and what is Bard College?
CHACE: Well, Paul Williams was a well known alumnus who left a
great deal of money for -- to endow a chair. And was interested
obviously in such things as government.
Bard is a small liberal arts college on the Hudson -- on the Hudson
River, up about two hours from New York, and it's a wonderful
school. It's got a wonderful -- school of about maybe 1,200, 1,300
students in it, (UNINTELLIGIBLE). And it's always been known as a
very much of an art school for a long time, but in the last 10, 15
years, under really quite a brilliant president called Leon
Botstein, a very inventive man, a brilliant educator, Bard has been
attracting students from all over the country who are interested in
things like politics or something like foreign affairs.
In fact, it's very interesting, but at the moment at Bard, the
largest number of students studying in the what we call the social
studies are in the Political Studies Department right now, which is
quite a change for the old Bard, and -- and still a lot of art
students, but there is a definite interest in politics there, and --
we have some very good people teaching there, it's a very rewarding
place to teach. I like it a lot, and I like teaching a lot.
LAMB: Just around the time we're taping this, and I mentioned this
to you when we started, there is a big story about E.L. Doctorow
giving a speech at Hudson University and accusing the president of
the United States, I think, of lying and a number of other things
around the Iraq war. And a big story was made out of it in "The New
York Times," and everybody started writing it up. But I noticed
when I got on the Web site; the same day at Bard College Robert
Redford gave basically some of the same comments about it. He
accused America of lying about Iraq, and nobody made anything out of
it. What is the reason?
CHACE: Well, it's-- it is -- probably the student body of Bard is a
very liberal -- leftist, liberal student body, quite frankly. I
didn't -- I was unable to go to graduation this year, but I asked
people about it and (UNINTELLIGIBLE). People who were at the
graduation never mentioned that part at all. They said, well, he
talked a lot about the environment, told us we should get out to
vote. So -- so that didn't have that kind of impact of horrifying
It doesn't mean there aren't people who are also -- some are more
conservative at Bard. Some of the students -- and there are indeed.
LAMB: Well, the reason I ask is that if Bard is somewhat of a
liberal school, Woodrow Wilson, William Howard Taft, Theodore
Roosevelt, Eugene Debs, came there today and what you know, or maybe
came there years ago, who would they like and why?
CHACE: Well, they certainly would like Debs for one thing. First
of all, he is leftist. Another thing about Debs is, he is -- I may
have to do the gesture -- I mean, he was just a tremendous, powerful
speaker. And they probably would have liked Theodore Roosevelt
next, who also was a powerful speaker. While it's true that Wilson
is an eloquent man, the energy that Debs and Roosevelt put in it was
so powerful and so strong. And probably Wilson would be third, and
I'm -- Taft would definitely be probably the least popular of the
four. Also, the poor man was not a very good speaker either.
LAMB: So, we go back to 1912...
LAMB... or maybe 1911, or what.
LAMB: Let me go through the four -- although we know a lot more
about Gene Debs, because he had been running a lot. In the 1912
election, when did Woodrow Wilson decide -- he had been governor of
New Jersey, he had been president of Princeton, when did he decide?
CHACE: That is a very interesting question, what happened to
Wilson. First of all, Wilson was -- had always been interested, I
think, in his own heart of hearts as a boy, probably, as a young
man, I'd love to be president some day. But the best way to become
president is not usually going to a university after all.
So he -- anyway -- he ends up as a teacher and a successful
scholar. He becomes president of Princeton. At Princeton,
initially he is very, very popular and successful president. He
wants to -- he instituted a system at Princeton where you had
tutorials of students, and he wants to break up what he considered
the sort of fraternity club system of Princeton.
But then he -- but he is unable to do that, and doesn't handle it
very well. He is a stubborn man, Wilson, doesn't do very well at
that. And then he also has a big fight about where the graduate
center is going to go. The important thing about that only is
again, Wilson was unable to compromise.
So after -- I found it at the beginning a rather successful
presidency with these tutorials and things, he ends up now being
rather unhappy at Princeton by 1910, 1911.
Now, let's go to New Jersey politics. New Jersey politics was run
by a bunch of bosses, and they were considered -- the Democrats, as
well as Republicans, and bossism was rampant. That was another
thing, by the way, I should mention, the people were very fed up
with it and they wanted to break the bosses if they could.
LAMB: Who were some of the bosses in 1919? Names?
CHACE: Oh, well, it was -- in New York the famous -- famous one --
was Charlie Murphy of Tammany Hall, which was a famous boss indeed,
and a man called Nugget (ph) was over -- in New Jersey, Jim Smith --
a number of them.
What happened in any case was that the bosses were looking around
for somebody that they could run for governor. And they -- their
reputation was fairly shady because of payoffs and things were also
going on with these people. They -- they came upon Woodrow Wilson,
and thought, well, he's an honorable man, he is honest, and he is a
conservative Democrat, which they were. They were -- you know --
they were -- they were -- to a certain degree, they did a lot of
things, good things for poor people, but they also didn't want the
unions to be too powerful, either. And they -- because they were
often working very closely with big businesses, to keep everything
So they go for Wilson, and he is a conservative Democrat. He's a
Southerner. He was frankly a white supremacist. He had also
written in a history of the American people published in the early --
in early 20th century a number of things which he said, hostile to
the new immigration, and the new immigration of that period was a
lot coming from Central Europe and Italy. So he was seen as a
conservative man and they thought he'd be -- he would be safe and --
because he was honest.
So they put him in -- they get him the nomination. And then much to
their astonishment, that he turns on them. Even in fact before he
got the nomination. Once they picked him to be the nominee, he
campaigned on much more liberal, much more progressive -- it's like
overnight he becomes a progressive.
Because Wilson realized whatever he may have personally thought
initially, that you couldn't really win that easily if you weren't a
progressive this period. The bosses were behind the times. They
were fighting these -- a lot of the reforms.
So Wilson ran as a reformer, and then when he was elected governor,
the bosses thought that he was just using a lot of rhetoric and that
really he would play ball again, he turns on the bosses, and through
various machinations gets rid of them as well.
So he -- he is now a full-fledged reformer and progressive type. He
adapts a lot of the policies, in other words, that Roosevelt had
been talking about in 1910 and 1911. He can no longer be
considered, quote, "a conservative Democrat," though he still
remains, frankly, a white supremacist.
But the Democratic Party, therefore, sees in Wilson how this man has
been successful in New Jersey; he was a very successful governor,
passed good, progressive legislation. And so, when the candidates,
they're looking at candidates in 1912 -- 1911 really of course -- it
comes down to really the three people are important in the party.
One, of course, is this new governor of New Jersey who has a good
reputation; the second is William Jennings Bryan, who also ran for
president a couple of times for the Democratic Party. He was a
populist, an old-fashioned populist, a liberal man, but not really
as much in touch with the current mood of reform, probably. He was -
- his voters had come from small towns, from a lot of farmers. Not
as much from the urban working class, which was becoming a much
bigger factor, and will become a big factor for the Democratic Party
to get. But -- so -- but Bryan would love to see the nomination go
to him yet again, having had it twice before.
And then a man called Champ Clark, who was the speaker -- in 1910,
he'd become the Democratic speaker of the House. And he was a
moderate reformer and a good party man. So it was by no means a
given that Wilson was going to get this nomination.
And then came this famous convention in Baltimore, which went for 46
ballots, and Wilson was not leading for a very long time. And at
one point during the midst of the convention, he thought he was
going to lose, and on the phone -- he was in his house in Princeton,
and called his campaign manager and said, look, look. Withdraw my
name. I'm not going to get this thing.
And then the -- another -- another -- another one of the other
managers got on the phone and said, listen, Governor, don't
withdraw. It's not over yet.
And part of the reason that he got things, because William Jennings
Bryan was maneuvering between Champ Clark and Woodrow Wilson,
saying -- because he still was a powerful figure in the party, and
secretly, of course, Bryan wanted to get the nomination again,
thought if he could sort of deadlock the party that would happen,
but it turned out that finally through some machinations Wilson got
LAMB: I want to read you back what you wrote about a man named
William McCombs. Remember him?
LAMB: "McCombs, moody, and hypersensitive, reacted to Wilson's
response to Bryan by escaping to a friend's house in Baltimore.
Tumulty learned afterwards where, quote, "he was found in a room,
lying across the bed crying miserably," unquote. To his friends,
who asked what was the matter, McCombs replied, weeping, that the
governor had spoiled everything by his telegram to Bryan, that had
the governor followed his, McCombs' advice, he could have been
nominated." I read it only...
LAMB... but I've heard of many grown men involved in political
campaigns crying over something like this.
CHACE: Well, and McCombs was a weepy man and a very nervous person,
not a very strong figure, and what he was doing (UNINTELLIGIBLE) is
that he -- Wilson refused to play ball with the bosses of New York.
McCombs was trying to make a deal with Charlie Murphy of the Tammany
people to get this nomination, and Wilson would not do this, you
see, and so, that is a little behind that statement. But he was a
very ineffective person, indeed. The other person, a man called
McAdoo, was much stronger and later -- and he was the person who
really stiffened Wilson's fight.
LAMB: Let's go to Theodore Roosevelt for a moment, and a kind of
the same thing. When he had been president after the assassination
of William McKinley in 1901.
LAMB: He then was elected in 1904. 1908, as you said earlier, he
passed it to William Howard Taft. This is 1912 election. When did
he decide to go against his friend William Howard Taft?
CHACE: It's a very good question, and it's an interesting one.
First of all, in 1904, Roosevelt made a really fatal error. In the
campaign -- he didn't have to do this, in the campaign he said, I'm
not going to run for a third term. Because in those days, as we all
know, you could run for -- there was no term limitation. Franklin
Roosevelt, after all, ran for four terms and won them all.
He could know man who could regret it more, that remark that he made
later. But he also -- but Roosevelt was a great man of honor, and
he felt he couldn't go back on that. At least that's what he
So he couldn't run for the third term, and he's going to put in his -
- his friend Taft, who would carry things out. And he goes off, as
I think, early to Africa to shoot wild beasts, and also not to pass
his shadow on Taft.
But while he's in Africa, he begins to get letters from his old
cronies saying that Taft is not carrying out his policies very
effectively, particularly issues of conservation, since Roosevelt
more than any other president took -- you know, saved millions and
millions of acres in the United States from being, you know,
destroyed by large companies. The park system is really -- the
large park in Yellowstone, all those big parks are really due to
In any case, so he gets -- he is very disturbed by this. He comes
back -- back to the United States. He feels -- and Taft is a good
friend, and he is disturbed by what's happening.
So -- so -- but he's not prepared when he gets back to run for
president or to do anything but actually campaign for Taft, even if
rather quietly. You can't put your finger on it exactly, what was
going on in his mind, but some time by 1911, a combination of two
things, I think. First of all, his genuine disenchantment with
Taft's ability to -- character. Taft being in the hands of what he
calls the archconservatives of the party, which he was.
And then secondly, I think there was power. Roosevelt missed power,
and he wanted that power back again. And the interesting thing
about power in his case, power for Theodore Roosevelt tended to be a
disciplinary thing. What I mean by that is when Roosevelt was out
of power, he would often say outrageous things. When in power, he
was much more moderate. He was a rabid imperialist before he became
president, but when he was president, except for the Panama Canal,
which one could consider an imperialist move, if one wants to, he
really moved away from that, got the Nobel Peace Prize. I think it
was in 1906, the Nobel Peace Prize for mediating the Russo-Japanese
So there was this -- so that as a foreign policy person, he wanted
the United States to play a great role in the world, but he had
moved away from the imperialist thing. He wanted (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
power. So in short, I think a combination of his disenchantment
with Taft and then his desire to -- he could do it better. You know
what I mean? He just missed that, and I think that's what happened.
LAMB: We don't have a lot of time, so I don't want you to go into
great deal on this, because I have got a lot of other things I want
to ask you about, but at the Republican Convention in 1912, where
was it held?
CHACE: It was held in -- Republican? In Chicago.
LAMB: And who won and...
CHACE: Well, it was Taft. Taft got the nomination away from
Roosevelt, because these delegates that Roosevelt had gotten in the
primaries were disqualified by the chairman of the convention, who
had been Roosevelt's secretary of state, by the way, Elihu Root.
But Roosevelt -- they were determined to keep the party machine.
They were not going to let Roosevelt take it away from them.
LAMB: Where did they have the Progressive Party convention and what
CHACE: Well, that also happened in Chicago very shortly afterwards.
LAMB: Right at the same place?
CHACE: Well, at the same time -- it was kind of a -- they didn't
have the convention a few weeks later, but there was a mass meeting
after Roosevelt had lost this -- was marched out, wasn't going to
get the nomination -- of progressives, to get Roosevelt to run for
president. And he said famously at that time, we stand at
Armageddon to do battle for the Lord. It was a very, very fervent --
a lot of fervor party. Jane Adams, the famous reformer, women's
suffragette, seconded Roosevelt's nomination at the actual
convention, which came a few weeks later. So.
LAMB: I don't have my hands no a quote, but is it safe to assume
that Theodore Roosevelt said things about William Howard Taft that
were stronger and more outspoken than anything we hear today about
any of these candidates in any of these parties?
CHACE: Oh, absolutely. I mean, absolutely. Called him a puzzle-
wit, he called him all sorts of things, you know.
LAMB: And he was his friend.
CHACE: And he had been his friend. He had been his friend. Of
course, they became very, very apart.
Although I want to mention, tell you that later on, you know, by --
during the First World War, they had one person at the time they
were against, which was Wilson, and they became friends again. And
I want to say one thing; it was very touching to me. They became
friends. In a hotel room in Chicago, they saw each other and...
LAMB: In the dining room.
CHACE: Dining room. Sorry. The dining room. And then Roosevelt
said to Taft, Will, you've got to come see me now at Sagamore Hills,
which was Roosevelt's home in Long Island, in a few weeks. And Taft
was very pleased. But they both were glad they could be friends
And Roosevelt died before he could have him over. And at the
funeral, Taft of course went to the funeral, and afterwards at the
graveside and after the graveside people left, and the last person
to leave the graveside was William Howard Taft, weeping.
LAMB: There is another story that you did, we've talked about it on
this program before, but you go into more detail than I've seen
before, and I'd be interested where you got it, on the famous John
Schrank attempted assassination...
CHACE: Of Theodore Roosevelt.
LAMB... of Theodore Roosevelt in Milwaukee.
CHACE: It was just amazing. It's one of the most extraordinary
stories of Roosevelt's strength and determination. Roosevelt, as we
all know, in those days particularly there was a lot of stem-winding
speeches and whistle-stopping across the country. Roosevelt is in
Milwaukee, and he's going to the hotel. He's supposed to give his
speech downtown. He's coming out of the hotel lobby, walks into an
open car. And gets in the automobile, and at that point a man comes
out of the crowd and shoots him. And wounds him.
LAMB: Did you say he was standing in the car? Was he standing up?
CHACE: I think he was standing -- he was standing in the car. He
fell over back like that. And it goes right -- and it goes right
into his chest.
The reason he lived at all was because he had a 50-page speech in
his inside pocket. Because it was not uncommon to give long, long
speeches in those days. Well, of course, his doctor and other
people, security people apprehend -- first, they apprehend
immediately the attempted assassin.
But Roosevelt, he says, I'm going to go and make that speech. Which
they were sort of horrified, and he just insists, I'm going to go.
And so they looked, and so he -- they do what they can with the
little wound. He goes down to this hall, filled with about 10,000
people, gets up on the stage, opens his shirt to show his -- the
blood all on the inside of the shirt, and says, "it takes more than
a bullet to kill a Bull Moose," because the progressives at that
time were known as the Bull Moose campaign. And he goes on for 50
minutes, for 50 minutes with a bullet lodged in his ribs, to make
this extraordinary speech. And then after that he goes to the
hospital for two weeks, during which time everybody, all the other
candidates cease campaigning, except for Wilson, who gives a few
LAMB: Did they ever take the bullet out?
CHACE: No, I don't think they did.
LAMB: There was another -- oh, I know, because we just have a
minute or two.
LAMB: You wrote the book on -- a book on Dean Acheson, but in the
book, this is a small matter, Louis Brandeis, who turned out to go,
he went -- Wilson put him on the...
CHACE: Supreme Court.
LAMB... Supreme Court, but you talk about Acheson clerking for
Brandeis, but more interesting about how Brandeis anonymously wrote
articles in support of Wilson in "Colliers" magazine. Explain that.
CHACE: That's right.
LAMB: And what happened.
CHACE: Yeah. Louis Brandeis, first of all, was at the time of 1912
was a very successfully brilliant lawyer in Boston. Wilson didn't
know him. But he was introduced to Brandeis, and Wilson didn't
quite have an idea of how to counter Roosevelt's theories of
regulating the monopoly. So how -- what was he going to come up
with? He didn't really know, he didn't have a good idea.
But Brandeis gave him this idea, and he said, look, it's all about
competition. Small business, we've got to -- and this is what --
you must talk about competition, you must talk about this kind of
new freedom. He began writing these articles and ghost-wrote
speeches and things like that. So Wilson was indebted to Brandeis
as his core ideas of competitiveness in the so-called -- what he
called the new freedom.
When he became president, he appointed Brandeis, and he was the
first Jew who was appointed to the Supreme Court, which was
something to do in those days, as you know. And Brandeis became, of
course, one of the most distinguished jurists in the history of the
LAMB: Again, though, reading what Brandeis stood for back then,
what would he be today, do you think?
CHACE: Well, you know, Brandeis was a person who believed, as did
Oliver Wendell Holmes, (UNINTELLIGIBLE), those who were dissenters
at that time, that it was important to go along with what the
Congress wanted. And if, in other words, if the Congress wants to
have the kind of things that Wilson wants to pass, that's what the
court should support, in other words they are very leery of
overruling what they felt...
LAMB: So he would be on Antonin Scalia's side?
CHACE: Well, I think that's an extreme remark. I don't think he
would have been quite as conservative as Scalia. We talk about
conservatives and liberals in very odd ways. I wouldn't say he'd be
a Scalia, no.
LAMB: But wasn't he for competition?
CHACE: Well, very much for competition, at that time, but at that
time, that would have been a very liberal point of view, because of
the fact that you had monopolies, so you were trying to break
monopolies. So things change in that way.
LAMB: Here is the cover of the book. Our guest has been James
Chace. He is a professor at Bard College. Here is "1912: Wilson,
Roosevelt, Taft and Debs -- the Election That Changed the Country."
Thank you very much.
CHACE: Thank you.